Newest US Senate Land Sale Amendment

Left messages again for Crapo and Rische. Spoke with Erika in Crapo’s office. She reiterated again that Crapo does not support the transfer of public land. I don’t know what this means in the bureaucracy of senate votes.

Voice mail for Risch.

I sent emails to Crapo and Rische on the topic and a thank you email to Simpson.
 
I got through to a Risch staffer earlier this week; interesting he has went straight to voicemail. I’d guess the heat is high
 
Left messages again for Crapo and Rische. Spoke with Erika in Crapo’s office. She reiterated again that Crapo does not support the transfer of public land. I don’t know what this means in the bureaucracy of senate votes.

Voice mail for Risch.

I sent emails to Crapo and Rische on the topic and a thank you email to Simpson.
More than I got from Crapo. Maybe I was too direct.
 
Not that Senator Lee cares, but Zinke saying public lands are his "San Juan Hill" is not so much hyperbole as I wonder an unintentional signal of warning. If public lands are just sold off en masse, if a guy finds No Trespassing signs where is grandfather taught his father to hunt, his father him, and where he had planned on taking his boy hunting, I don't think it is a stretch to see that repeated over and over as a very destabilizing thing - a very radicalizing and conflict generating thing beyond just people being pissed off about the politics du jour.
 
So, Glen Beck, what is it that Mike Lee wants to sell?

Beck seems to be confirming that Mike Lee would love to sell hunting grounds, with his description in this post that was shared by Mike Lee.

Mike Lee says he only wants to sell lands close to cities for affordable housing. Glen says it’s remote backcountry.

Reality is that neither of them have ever set foot in any of it. They’re backpedaling hard, trying to salvage a shitty idea.

IMG_5514.jpeg
 
More than I got from Crapo. Maybe I was too direct.
Erika offered up the statement to me. I’m sure she’s under guidance from Crapo on the statement. I didn’t ask her follow up questions. She probably a college intern trying to survive each day. I doubt she would provide anything more than a wide open statement.

To me, it sounds like Crapo is having backroom discussions to eliminate the amendment without a vote or something similar. Crapo is in a strong position as Chairman of the Finance Committee. I might be optimistic.
 
Wow, this is really getting interesting. Mike Schmid, a Wyoming legislator is hardly considered a liberal Marxist as Lee, Hegeman, Beck, and the other leghumpers would claim. Making their backdoor deal with Mike Lee is going to give the Wyoming Senators some headaches in the short-term.


Screenshot 2025-06-20 at 11.11.55 AM.png
 
I was disappointed to see The Wall Street Journal publish a house editorial today backing the land sale. They'll likely publish a letter to the editor if someone writes a good rebuttal, lots of people read those.

Article pasted below since there's a paywall.

Uncle Sam owns nearly half of the land west of the Rockies, and GOP lawmakers want to give states and businesses a tiny piece of the action. Selling a small amount of federal land would raise revenue and spur development, so why are some Republicans trying to protect the government’s hoard?

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee announced a plan last week to sell public land as part of the GOP’s reconciliation bill. The proposal designates about 258 million acres of land—40% of federal holdings—as potentially available for sale. It directs the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to sell up to 3.3 million acres from these designated zones.

The areas up for sale would exclude land with dedicated uses such as national parks and monuments, and land previously leased for mining, energy production and other activities. The plan directs federal agencies to prioritize selling land that is near existing roads or suitable for home-building. Agencies would consult governors before auctioning land in their states, and state and local governments would have the right to make an offer before private bidders.

The selloffs would put unused resources in the hands of owners who commit to invest. The available land includes areas that are sometimes used for cattle grazing, but ranchers and other users would have ample time to comment before these parcels are sold. The sales would also raise money to offset tax cuts in the rest of the bill.

But some in Congress want to save every acre of Uncle Sam’s estate. The House originally included a smaller version of the land sale in its bill until a handful of Members opposed it, led by Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke. “Once the land is sold, we will never get it back. God isn’t creating more land,” says Mr. Zinke, who ran the Interior Department in President Trump’s first term. He says the sales would harm the environment with little upside.

Yet the government is typically a poor steward of the land it holds. The Forest Service has skipped or delayed controlled burns that thin out overgrown areas susceptible to wild fires. Farmers and ranchers are often blocked from expanding into large unoccupied areas they could put to good use. And there’s no limit to Congress’s power to make parks out of the most pristine areas, as Sen. Mike Lee has argued.

Senators have set a good marker by restoring the land sale to the bill and broadening its scope. Transferring a sliver of federal land into private hands is the least Congress can do to better share the country’s treasure.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
117,389
Messages
2,155,487
Members
38,207
Latest member
ncaroline797
Back
Top